CHAPTER FOUR

FUTURISM'S FUNDAMENTAL FALLACY

The book of Revelation was written for the church of Jesus Christ
(see Rev. 1:11; 22:16; 2:7, 11, 29; 3:6, 13, 22, etc.), and at its close
our Lord says: "I Jesus have sent mine angel to testify unto you
these things in the churches" (Rev. 22:16). Yet, despite the
Lord's own statements given in the Revelation, and despite the plain
teaching of the New Testament that the church is now "the Israel of
God" (Gal. 6:16, etc.), Futurists declare that because it contains
so much imagery pertaining to "Israel" it deals mainly with
the literal Jew in Palestine!

To rightly appreciate any teaching it is always necessary to observe
carefully its basic principles. We will let Dr. Scofield's Bible (which
speaks for Futurism) state the underlying principle of Futurism :-

Futurism denies "that the church is the true Israel, and that
the Old Testament foreview of the kingdom is fulfilled in the church"
(p.989).

This is, as we have shown, the direct contradiction of the plain
teaching of the New Testament, and also the time-tested teaching of the
Christian church for hundreds of years. Futurists ignore the plain
declarations of Scripture that "wrath is come upon them [the literal
nation of Israel] to the uttermost" (1 Thess. 2:16); that as a
nation they have been so broken that they "cannot be made
whole again" (Jer. 19:11); and that Christ had explicitly declared
to them: "The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and
given to a nation [the church, 1 Pet. 2:9] bringing forth the fruit
thereof" (Matt. 21:43).

Futurists, not guided by the New Testament teaching that spiritual
Israel - the church - has taken the place of national Israel, still
build their doctrines and their hopes for the world upon a belief in a literal,
Palestinian fulfillment of the prophecies pertaining to Israel. Thus
Scofield's Bible, on p. 1226, comments: "The promise of the kingdom
to David and his seed, described in the prophets (2 Sam. 7:8-17, refs.;
Zech. 12:8) enters the New Testament absolutely unchanged (Luke
1:31-33)." (Italics mine.) But Scofleld overlooks the fact that, as
the church inherits all that belonged to Israel (in a higher sense), it
also inherits the phraseology of national Israel: the same words and
designations refer to both. In other publications the writer has
given scores of examples taken from the New Testament. There is no
change in the phraseology employed in the New Testament, but there
is positively a change regarding the people to whom those
prophecies and designations now apply. In the New Testament, the church
is spoken of in the language employed in the Old Testament concerning
Israel. The prophecies and blessings which at one time referred to
national Israel now refer to the church. Because the church and her
enemies are thus described in the Revelation, Futurists see only the
literal Jewish nation and Palestine in the many references to the things
of Israel contained in the book of Revelation. The Revelation can be
rightly understood, its moral purpose discerned, only when Old Testament
historical events, persons, names, numbers, colors, etc., are applied spiritually
in connection with Christ and His church.

Similar to Jewish theology in the days of Jesus, Futurism is based
upon a rigid, literal interpretation of Scripture. Concerning this
Futuristic position, Dr. 0. T. Allis says

"It is the insistent claim of its advocates that, only when
interpreted literally, is the Bible interpreted truly; and they denounce
as 'spiritualizers' or 'allegorizers' those who do not interpret the
Bible with the same degree of literalness as they do. . . . The question
of literal versus figurative interpretation is, therefore, one which has
to be faced at the very outset. And it is to be observed at once that
the issue cannot be stated as a simple alternative, either literal or
figurative. No literalist, however thoroughgoing, takes everything in
the Bible literally. Nor do those who lean to a more figurative method
of interpretation, insist that everything is figurative. Both principles
have their proper place and their necessary limitations. . . . The most
precious teachings of the Bible are spiritual; and these spiritual and
heavenly realities are often set forth under the form of earthly objects
and human relationships. . . . And spiritual things are more real and
more precious than visible, tangible, ephemeral things. For 'The things
represented have much more of reality and perfection in them than the
things by which we represent them.' The words 'This is My body' do not
lose, but gain, in meaning when the literal sense is rejected as
unscriptural." ("Prophecy and the Church," pp.16-18.)